#2726

The only thing I’ve labeled you as, is someone who have “reading comprehension problems / trolling” and “high functioning autism”. With both I have added it is okay, meaning they were not meant to be a very strong insult.

The rest is either false, or was a joke.

You will clearly see in my posts to you that you don’t understand what I am saying many times…
Just move on and determine you don’t like me very much. Things got heated I admit, so can it be sometimes…

#2727

I was explaining to my daughter only yesterday that it’s quite typical for Bullies to defend their bullying as “just a joke”.

This is so lacking in insight. You can’t fabricate a diagnosis for someone, or insult them, and then simply say “but it’s ok by me”. This is not acceptable behaviour.

#2728

Bro, there is literally a winking emoji, which is meant to signal friendliness.

image

Which is pretty weird that you left it out of that quote, just like it was weird how you cut a quote in half earlier on in the conversation…

#2729

Have you noticed that no one else here insults people and then follows it with a wink emoji?

There may be a reason for that.

#2730

I don’t see that it matters. You can read it either way. Leaving it is easier because you don’t have to go to a different thread to continue. I’d leave it but it doesn’t matter.

I think lipids are a great subject matter and Rapa does affect lipids. Keto affects lipids too. These things are tied together and it’s not a surprise some people have very inflexible views. I usually enjoy reading it, but will skip over when it gets long and personal.

1 Like
#2731

Yes, it probably doesn’t matter to lock this thread.
I thought about a title change, but it is probably perfect as it is.

Hopefully RapAdmin doesn’t lock this thread because of a few troublemakers like me. I will be more careful what I say instead…

5 Likes
#2732

Also I will not accept gaslighting under any circumstance. I 100% stand by everything I said in the thread at the time I said it.

For those interested, they can read the entire conversation.

#2734

Yes, true.

I have put that user on ignore, although I could have said things more carefully and phrased it in a nicer way, I do not like people who are doing quote manipulation in this context and try to win on all fronts and in as a convincing way possible even if, in my opinion, lies are being told. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and this is mine.

But you don’t have to lock this thread as I won’t engage with that user and I will be more careful going forward. For those interested, can read the entire conversation themselves.

1 Like
#2735

“The scientists found that dropping cholesterol to the lowest level possible – to levels similar to those we were born with – reduced the risk of heart attack, stroke or fatal heart disease by around one third.”

Risk is reduced by only 33%? You’d think if cholesterol/LDL/ApoB was the primary cause of CVD then risk would be reduced by more than that.

Getting LDL levels below 60 isn’t easy, particularly without side effects.

It seems to me that something is missing here in terms understanding the CVD process.

#2736

The duration of the study is very short. If you look at Mendelian randomization evidence, the effect compounds depending on duration.

#2737

This was an interesting video and the study mentioned at the end should be interesting as well.

2 Likes
#2738

And there may be risks to targeting extremely low ldl-c. I think it’s important to note that the Odyssey trial thought: “It is important to note that, although adverse consequences of very low LDL-C were not identified in these trials, the long-term effects of very low levels of LDL-C induced by PCSK9 inhibitors are unknown.”

I think this gives a good overview of the state of the science re brain effects of targeting very low ldl-c (as at Sept 2023.)
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/ATV.0000000000000164

The mendelian randomization studies also detect a negative re diabetes:
“In conclusion, genetic variants in PCSK9 that associate with lower concentrations of LDL cholesterol are also associated with a modestly higher risk of type 2 diabetes and with associated differences in measures of glycaemia and bodyweight”

1 Like
#2739

My LDL dropped from 152 to 95 within 7 months on rosuvastatin 5mg, ezetimibe 10 mg + supplements. For the first time my cholesterol is normal, but CAC is elevated (almost 300 for coronary artery).

4 Likes
#2740

Hi Lara, i know you’re taking (thinkjng of taking?) Nattokinase. But i found the links from this interesting

“Supplementation with vitamin K2 and D3 has been suggested to have a protective role in the progression of CAC.” Protocol: Effects of vitamins K2 and D3 supplementation in patients with severe coronary artery calcification: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial - PMC.

They’re trying dose: 720 µg/day of MK-7 and 25 µg/day of vitamin D3

2 Likes
#2741

So as in my case, with a positive CAC, low dose statin is advisable to reduce risk. Hope you’re taking K2 and CoQ10 as well to minimize side effects. BTW - I’ve read that water soluble statins (like rosuvastatin) are less risky than fat soluble ones. Also consider taking Kyolic Aged Garlic and Nattokinase as well (look up the studies on PubMed).

One interesting study on CAC showed that if we can reduce the growth of CAC to less than 15% year then our risk of an MI drops significantly, and approaches that of someone with a CAC=0. That’s a worthwhile target (though obviously you don’t want to be get tested every year because the radiation has its own risks). I plan to get a follow up test 3-4 years from now. Crossing my fingers! LOL

5 Likes
#2742

D3/K2 - yes, I’m taking both, as well as CoQ10.

3 Likes
#2743

Review

1 Like
#2744

Yes CAC progression looks like a better measure of risk (rather than absolute levels). I couldn’t find your study but these are interesting

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0735109710037253

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1936878X1731001X?via%3Dihub

2 Likes
#2745

It may be true that the rate of progression varies and hence it is possible that it can be static. However, the underlying difficulty is having a system for measuring CAC that enables someone to track it without harm (or massive cost).

It may be possible to pick this sort of thing up from complex measurements of blood flow.

However, in the end I think there probably is a point where the absolute levels indicate more frequent measurement.

#2746

Yes, you’re right it may be more predictive without being useful for practical reasons.

I was also thinking that it would be helpful psychologically for people to know that, despite high CAC, if they could achieve low apo B / ldl-c then their risk is potentially much lower than most would believe. There’s nothing like a bit of hope!

1 Like